Citation NR: 9720194
Decision Date: 06/10/97 Archive Date: 06/19/97
DOCKET NO. 95-38 284 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Louisville,
Kentucky
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to assistance in the acquisition of specially
adapted automotive equipment.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Paralyzed Veterans of America,
Inc.
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
John D. Nachmann, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran had active military service from September 1943
to August 1944.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) on appeal from a decision of April 1995 by the
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) in
Louisville, Kentucky.
REMAND
In this case, the veteran is seeking rear air conditioning
and a captainís chair for his motor vehicle. He asserts that
he is in need of this adaptive equipment as he is unable to
safely operate his vehicle without them. The veteran
contends that a rear air conditioner is required because his
motor vehicle is not properly cooled by the front air
conditioner alone, which interferes with his ability to
operate his vehicle safely. The veteran further asserts that
a captainís chair is required because he needs a chair with
arm rests as his hands shake due to his service-connected
disorder.
The Board notes that although the veteran has submitted an
application for a rear air conditioner for his motor vehicle,
he has not submitted the required physicianís statement
listing the medical findings supporting his need for this
equipment. See M-2, Part IX, 4.02(m). Furthermore, the
veteranís representative asserted in his January 1997
informal hearing presentation that the July 1995 statement of
the case was vague on the issues and failed to provide
sufficient reasons and bases for the denial of the benefit
sought on appeal. Specifically, the veteranís representative
expressed displeasure with the reason given by the VAMC for
its decision regarding the veteranís request for assistance
in the acquisition of a captainís chair.
In reviewing the statement of the case, the Board concurs in
the assessment that the statement of the case is deficient in
that no explanation was provided for the denial of a
captainís chair other than the fact that the record
purportedly indicated that the veteran had never been
reimbursed for such in the past. Further, the VAMC did not
fully explain the legal authority for the dollar amount
limitations on providing reimbursement for adaptive equipment
in the present case, explain whether the veteran was
receiving the standard or maximum reimbursable amount and
why, or explain the procedure, if any, for reimbursement
above any authorized maximum reimbursable amounts. The
veteran must be furnished a complete and accurate statement
of the case which includes all relevant governing legal
authority and adequate reasons and bases in order to provide
him with proper notice and the opportunity to present
argument and evidence in support of his claim based on such
information.
Therefore, in order to give the veteran every consideration
with respect to the present appeal, it is the Boardís opinion
that further development of the case is warranted.
Accordingly, this case is REMANDED for the following actions:
1. The VAMC should contact the veteran,
through his representative, and ask him
to provide a physicianís statement
listing the medical findings supporting
the veteranís need for rear air
conditioning in his motor vehicle. All
records obtained should be associated
with the claims file.
2. After the above-requested development
has been completed, and a response has
been received from the veteran or a
reasonable time period to respond has
elapsed, the case should be reviewed by
the VAMC. If the determination remains
adverse to the veteran, the case should
be returned to the Board after compliance
with the provisions for processing
appeals, including the issuance of a
supplemental statement of the case, which
sets forth all pertinent laws and
regulations as well as the complete
reasons and bases for the determination,
and provision of the applicable time
period for response thereto. The
supplemental statement of the case should
address the noted deficiencies in the
statement of the case, as set forth
above.
The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional
development, and the Board does not intimate any opinion as
to the merits of the case, either favorable or unfavorable,
at this time. No action is required of the veteran until he
is notified.
S. L. KENNEDY
Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals
38 U.S.C.A. ß 7102 (West Supp. 1996) permits a proceeding
instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual
member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has
been assigned to an individual member of the Board.
Under 38 U.S.C.A. ß 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the nature of a
preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the
Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. ß 20.1100(b)
(1996).
- 2 -